選舉課責─以2016年新北市與臺中市立法委員選舉為例

Abstract

本文旨在研究政治人物或政黨的表現如何影響選民對立法委員進行選舉課責。課責是民主政治運作的重要基石，而選舉機制則是體現政治課責最直接的制度設計。現有選舉課責研究多數聚焦於行政首長的表現如何影響選民的投票選擇，以立法委員選舉為對象的選舉課責研究相對顯得不足，且這些研究或者是在舊選制的架構內進行分析，或是旨在探索選民的分裂投票行為，未見新選制下的選舉課責研究。\n本研究以2016年新北市與臺中市的立法委員選舉為例，分析選民對總統、市長、政黨、政黨立委與區域立委五種層面的表現評價如何影響其立委投票對象。企圖了解選民是否真的會因為現任者表現不佳而投給在野黨、或因滿意現任者表現而投給執政黨？而當不同層面的表現評價發生衝突時，哪一項的表現評價影響力更大？並藉由兩個不同黨籍的直轄市長，來解析過去研究未曾在立委選舉研究中觸及的地方首長施政表現因素會如何影響選民的投票抉擇。\n本研究發現，選民在區域與不分區立委選舉中均會以市長與區域立委的表現作為課責依據，而政黨立委表現評價僅對區域立委選舉有影響，政黨表現評價及不分區名單印象則影響不分區立委選舉，至於過去研究認為會影響立委選舉結果的總統施政表現評價，反而在統計模型中未達顯著水準。這樣的結果，除了立委與政黨本身表現在各自選票上的影響力外，更凸顯了地方首長的施政表現對於立委選舉的重要性，當總統與立委選舉合併舉辦後，立委選舉不再是總統的期中成績單，而是地方首長的期中成績單與現任者的期末成績單，被課責的對象包含了現任者本身（立委與政黨）與地方首長。這些研究發現與既有的研究提供一個重要的對照與補充，也希望這些發現能提供未來選舉課責與地方治理研究的助益。

Accountability is the cornerstone for the operation of democracy, and election is the mechanism realizing political accountability. Most studies on electoral accountability focused on the influence of presidential performance at the national level while the influences of legislators themselves and local governments are less concerned.This essay explores how the performance of the president, the legislators, the local governments, and the political parties influence electorate’s vote choice in the 2016 legislative elections in New Taipei City and Taichung City in Taiwan. Political accountability is operationalized as voter’s performance assessments of the president, the legislator, the city mayors, and the two major political parties. It is assumed that an electorate will be more likely to vote for the legislative candidate based on favorable assessments of her party’s president, legislators, city mayors, list of at-large candidates and overall party performance. The study finds that the performance of city mayors and the performance of (district as well at–large party list) legislators have exercised significant impact on voter’s choice. Meanwhile, voters’ assessment of political parties and impression of party list candidate will influence voter’s choice in the at-large legislative election. As for the evaluation of presidential performance which has been widely discussed in the literature, this essay finds only limited impact. As the elections for legislator and president are held concurrently, the impact of the presidential performance is overshadowed by the performance of local executives. These findings provide crucial comparison and supplementation with the previous studies of political accountability and offer valuable references for the future study of electoral accountability and local governance.